On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 23:48 +0200, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:> On 27.05.2010 21:08, john stultz wrote:> > I'd be very interested in hearing more about the host side issue. So> > this happened with the same kernel that you were using before, with no> > trouble?> > Correct.> > > Could you also send dmesg output from this boot? And if you can find> > any older dmesg logs to compare with, send those too?> > See http://users.birkenwald.de/~berni/temp/dmesg-lenny and > http://users.birkenwald.de/~berni/temp/dmesg-squeeze . Although running > on the same kernel binary the initrd changed greatly when upgrading, so > ordering/timing between those two is off.> > Note that the dmesg output is captured right after boot. I think I > remember seeing a "TSC unstable" message pretty soon after boot, but I > might be mixing it up with my other AMD-based KVM server. I don't hold > normal (non-boot) logs that long, so I can't tell for sure.

Not sure how that might be linked to the distro upgrade. It could havebeen something like SMI damage during the calibration time, but Ithought the calibration loop watched for that.

Bernhard: I expect with all those vms, this machine isn't rebootedfrequently. So could you look at the logs to see how much the "Detectedxxxx.yyy MHz processor." line varies by across a few other boots (ifthey still exist?).Ingo/Thomas: Any thoughts, should we be considering dropping thequick_pit_calibrate() code and always do the slower route?